By Tony Hake, Denver Climate Change Examiner

The science on manmade climate change may be settled as far as some are concerned, but the debate continues to rage on not only in the scientific community but also within industry groups and professional organizations. This week some members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce left the group due to its opposition to cap and trade legislation. At the other side, some scientific organizations have members objecting to the organizations’ alarmist statements.

Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) took the unusual step of resigning from the Chamber of Commerce earlier this month over the group’s opposition to climate change legislation in its current form. The Chamber has called for a ‘trial’ on the science behind climate change and said that “any climate change response must include all major CO2 emitting economies, promote new technologies, emphasize efficiency, ensure affordable energy for families and businesses, and help create American jobs and return our economy to prosperity.”

In a strongly worded letter, President and Chief Executive Officer of PG&E Thomas Donohue accused the group of ignoring what PG&E feels is “a threat that cannot be ignored.” He said the group’s “Extreme rhetoric and obstructionist tactics” do not reflect his company’s views.

Following in PG&E’s tracks, Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) left the group as did a third utility company, Exelon. Excelon CEO John Rowe recently told a conference, “The carbon-based free lunch is over.” Nike became the fourth company to object to the Chamber’s stance as it resigned its board position but said it would retain its membership.

The moves by these businesses drew a great deal of attention in the media and those in the ‘green’ movement supported the company’s. However, these four companies are but a small percentage of the group’s membership which numbers over 3 million businesses and organizations.

Scientific organizations that usually advocate for swift and immediate action to battle climate change have also upset their members but for the opposite reason - some members are not convinced that manmade climate change is a real threat.

“I am of the opinion that this is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people.” Dr. Bill Gray on the manmade climate change theory

Earlier this year William (Bill) Gray, Professor Emeritus of Colorado State University who is best known for his hurricane forecasts, fired one of the first shots by asserting the American Meteorological Society was being usurped by global warming alarmists.

The AMS had announced it would award the Rossby Research Medal to Dr. James Hansen of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies. Gray objected saying that Hansen was not trained in earth sciences and that the climate change models Hansen uses to issue climate warnings are inaccurate. In a letter he titled On The Hijacking of the American Meteorological Society, Gray said, “I am of the opinion that this is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people.”

The American Physical Society, a professional association for physicists, received a letter from 54 of its members in May objecting to the group’s climate change advocacy. The letter said in part, “Measured or reconstructed temperature records indicate that 20th - 21st century changes are neither exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show many periods warmer than today.”

“There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC”: American Physical Society editors

APS editors had acknowledged in 2008 that the scientific ‘consensus’ may not be as strong as some alarmists believe. They wrote, “There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution.”

The APS has agreed to review its current climate statement to ensure it met the beliefs of its membership and of the best science available.

In July, editors of Chemical & Engineering News, a magazine published by the American Chemical Society (ACS), found themselves amid an uprising by its members after publishing an editorial attacking those who dare to question man’s effect on the climate. The editorial in the June 22nd issue of the magazine said those that deny anthropogenic [manmade] global warming use “the same tactics used by other purveyors of nonsense rejected by the mainstream scientific community” including the belief in creationism.

One week later, the professional members of ACS let their opinion be known and it most likely is not the response some might expect. The July 27th issue of the magazine was filled with dozens of letters rebuking the magazine and its parent society for being so dismissive of dissenting opinions on climate change. The letters bordered on a rebellion within the society as it draws harsh criticism and calls for Mr. Baum to resign.

All of these events and others would seem to indicate that the debate about manmade climate change is not truly settled. While it may be easy to dismiss business groups that are struggling with a message on climate change, there is obviously considerable dissent within the scientific community as well.

See the new Climate Change Examiner here.